I may be wrong but:
What we all are missing here is "an applicant who's not in Canada (holding no status like refuge, student, work permit, immigration) as landed immigrant/any status and he/she was in his/her home town during first 6 or 12-months of 4 year, why would those 183 days be counted towards absence from Canada?"
If needed, the applicant had already submitted that Police Certificate as part of his/her immigration application before.
My understanding is that, if we look at old forms where 6 yrs is mentioned, it clearly says "or after becoming permanent resident." So in new form, with last 4 years and if we add 'or becoming PR' the entire confusion would go away.
I already had sent a message to IRCC and waiting for their reply regarding same.
Not really. This has not been missed.
This has been raised and addressed multiple times, going back to the summer when Bill C-6 received Royal Assent.
The Short, Best Answer: Respond to item 10.b truthfully. If the truthful response is yes, check "yes" and follow the instructions, and thus either provide a police certificate or an explanation why one could not be obtained.
In deciding how to answer item 10.b, count all days in another country during the preceding four years, including days prior to becoming a PR. If the total number of days in another country is 183 or more, check "yes." And again, follow the instructions.
In other words:
If in doubt, follow the instructions; otherwise, yep, follow the instructions. A key instruction to follow: be truthful.
Some propose an alternative approach for those who are confident they do not need to submit a police certificate, even though the truthful answer to the yes/no question in item 10.b is yes:
The main versions of the proposition are, essentially, that there is an exception for applicants who have not left Canada since landing as a PR, or that days prior to landing do not count when adding up the total number of days in another country.
I would caution against conflating arguments about why there should be such an exception (such as these individuals have already provided PCC covering that time in that country) versus what IRCC actually requires from citizenship applicants. No matter how strong the argument is about why there SHOULD be such an exception, what matters is whether or not IRCC actually recognizes such an exception.
There is nothing in the form, help, instructions in the Guide, the PDIs, or the FAQs, which even hints that IRCC recognizes such an exception.
This includes looking at older forms and instructions.
In particular, the following is simply NOT true (from post by
NN74 and quoted in full above):
"My understanding is that, if we look at old forms where 6 yrs is mentioned, it clearly says 'or after becoming permanent resident.' So in new form, with last 4 years and if we add 'or becoming PR' the entire confusion would go away."
Again, this is not true. While numbered differently, this item was almost the same in the old forms as it is in the current form.
In the current form, it is item 10.b and it states:
In the past four (4) years, were you in another country (other than Canada) for a total of 183 days or more? [No] [Yes]
If yes, list each country in the chart below. You must provide a police certificate for each country where you have been present for 183 days or more. If you cannot get a police certificate, tell us why below.
The form then provides a box with two columns, one titled "Country" and the other titled "Explanation."
In the forms in use prior to October 11, 2017, going back to the June 2015 version which was the first version after the four year prohibition for convictions in other countries took effect (which was in late May 2015), the item was 6.M. and it stated:
In the past four (4) years, were you present in a country, other than Canada, for a total of 183 days or more?
[No] [Yes] - If you have checked "YES", indicate each country in the box below. You must provide police certificates for each country where you have been present for 183 days or more. If you cannot get a police certificate from a country, provide details in the box below.
Those forms provided just an open box.
Note that between the time (June 2015) when submitting police certificates first became part of the application form (attendant coming into force of the additional prohibition for foreign convictions), and October 11 (when new rules including the 3/5 rule came into effect), there was no possible factual scenario in which someone eligible for citizenship (under the then applicable 4/6 rules) would not be a PR for the entire four years preceding the date of application. The absolute minimum time as a PR was four years. So any reference to "or after becoming permanent resident" would have made no sense at all for this item at that time.
Moreover, An Overriding Clue:
By the way, the current citizenship application has all but eliminated restricting history questions referencing the time period "or after becoming a permanent resident." (There is still this distinction, of course, for purposes of calculating credit for time in Canada, but in nearly all other respects this is no longer a parameter for how to answer history items in the citizenship application.)
For example, the applicant must declare work history for the full five years prior to applying. Likewise address history. In the item for address history, emphasis (an underline) is added to the word "entire" in the instruction to provide addresses for "the
entire eligibility period," the eligibility period being the full five years even for an applicant who first came to Canada and became a PR less than five years previous.
An applicant who landed in September 2014, for example, planning to apply December 3, 2017, must report addresses and work history going back to December 2012, even though that address and work history was accounted for in the PR visa application.
The instructions are actually quite redundant in referencing the need to cover the entire eligibility period, that is, the full five years, regardless when a person became a PR.